• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Questionable Logic Supporting the Existence of God

rojse

rojse

RF Addict
Although the majority of theists are quite rational in their belief systems, and how they support their beliefs, there are some that... well, are not.

So, what is the poorest evidence or logic you have encountered to support the existence of God?
 
rojse

rojse

RF Addict
I'm trying to find the thread Jay started about Mickiel's archaeological evidence for Jesus. Fifty-odd pages of laughs, there.
 
N

Nepenthe

Tu Stultus Es
rojse said:
Although the majority of theists are quite rational in their belief systems, and how they support their beliefs, there are some that... well, are not.

So, what is the poorest evidence or logic you have encountered to support the existence of God?
Click to expand...
Design, first cause, Pascal's Wager, cosmological, and ontological arguments come to mind as all being woefully illogical.
 
rojse

rojse

RF Addict
Sugriva said:
Design, first cause, Pascal's Wager, cosmological, and ontological arguments come to mind as all being woefully illogical.
Click to expand...

But many theists on here acknowledge that the core of their belief is based upon their personal experiences, and are not worth using to convince other people of their beliefs.
 
ThereIsNoSpoon

ThereIsNoSpoon

Active Member
rojse said:
So, what is the poorest evidence or logic you have encountered to support the existence of God?
Click to expand...
The "best" thing i ever got was something the like of:

HIM: You see that trees exist don't you ?
ME: yes
HIM: See ... God must exist. How else could trees exist ?
 
Willamena

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
rojse said:
But many theists on here acknowledge that the core of their belief is based upon their personal experiences, and are not worth using to convince other people of their beliefs.
Click to expand...
Luckily there is no requirement to convince others of their beliefs.
 
N

Nepenthe

Tu Stultus Es
rojse said:
But many theists on here acknowledge that the core of their belief is based upon their personal experiences, and are not worth using to convince other people of their beliefs.
Click to expand...
Yep. That's all well and good; their personal experiences are worthless in trying to convince anyone of their convictions. An internal, inscrutable belief that is not amendable to investigation is irrelevant. The invisible and non-existent look much alike.
I wonder how accepting theists would be of non-theists if the claim were that I'm an atheist based on personal experiences that cannot be analyzed or questioned; they simply are. My atheism is incapable of logical scrutiny, it's purely internal and incapable of being critiqued. I cannot define, explain or rationalize my atheism, but I demand you respect my stance despite the utter lack of defense.

Of course none of that is true; my atheism is capable of investigation and is amendable to reasoned analysis.
 
Kilgore Trout

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
Sugriva said:
Of course none of that is true; my atheism is capable of investigation and is amendable to reasoned analysis.
Click to expand...

That is why you fail.

YODA.JPG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top